That will be a big move for both the Pac 12 and the big 10. Hopefully this settles the college landscape as well.

Also, I wonder if other conferences end up doing this (ie. the Big XII and SEC, or SEC and ACC) what this would do for ND. Most of these conferences are going to 9 conference games, and now if they have one guaranteed game between each other, that would be 10 games taken up. And usually a school wants a cupcake game or two.

Its a great move for the Big 10 / Pac 12 since there schools have similar academic and athletic reputations. Plus this gives both conferences access to the other coast with increased exposure. Great move by both leagues and should settle the landscape for the forseeable future.

I agree with 9 conference games and now 1 guaranteed game with another conference ND will have trouble with schools only having limited space on their schedule after a tune-up game.

I'm hoping it settles things down. It would be nice to watch a few college FB seasons w/o all of the added drama of expansion.

Seems from the comments that the Pac 12 is done for the foreseeable future, mainly because they have limited options out there and Texas and OU aren't coming anytime soon, so they are pretty much done.

Delany's comments seem to point that they would be open to it again in the future, but they want a few years for things to settle.

newarenanow wrote:Delany's comments seem to point that they would be open to it again in the future, but they want a few years for things to settle.

Big 10 wants ND. This could help to force their hand.

It was just announced that ND had it's lowest ratings ever with NBC this FB season at 1.6.

While ND is still a strong brand, and still has national appeal, to me it seems that each year, they lose some luster and appeal, and that younger generations don't view ND in the same light as older generations.

I think one day in the next decade or so, ND may have to make the tough choice of joining a conference.

newarenanow wrote:Delany's comments seem to point that they would be open to it again in the future, but they want a few years for things to settle.

Big 10 wants ND. This could help to force their hand.

It was just announced that ND had it's lowest ratings ever with NBC this FB season at 1.6.

While ND is still a strong brand, and still has national appeal, to me it seems that each year, they lose some luster and appeal, and that younger generations don't view ND in the same light as older generations.

I think one day in the next decade or so, ND may have to make the tough choice of joining a conference.

Isn't NBC launching a new sports channel as well? If they are putting a lot of money and resources into that you would think they would want more bang for their buck than ND football and their 1.6 rating.

thehockeyguru wrote:Isn't NBC launching a new sports channel as well? If they are putting a lot of money and resources into that you would think they would want more bang for their buck than ND football and their 1.6 rating.

Yes. I think they will pick up the Big East as well as keep ND in the next contract.

thehockeyguru wrote:I dont see much appeal in BE football. With WVU, Pitt and Syracuse out its going to get worse.

I don't think there is a ton of appeal either, but with the other 5 BCS conferences wrapped up in ESPN, I think NBC will make a nice bid to get probably the next best thing for their channel. Plus, even though 3 great BB schools are leaving, the Big East BB is still going to be strong and have some appeal.

Just like the NHL, it won't get the exposure it does on ESPN, but it won't be burried either and will have it's own time slots.

And I know some people will probably roll their eyes, but I think NBC would be willing to pay around $10MM per FB school for the TV contract. While not approaching the other 5 BCS conferences once their deals are redone (ACC, Big XII, and SEC), it still pays a signficant amount more than the other 5 non AQ conferences.

I think you'll see a large gap between the 5 AQ conferences and the Big East, and then the Big East and the other 5 non AQs.

Looks like when the Pac 12 v. B1G football games are set, the B1G will revert to an 8 game conference schedule. I really like the B1G ACC basketball challenge now, and to extend this to all sports against the PAC 12 will add some excitement. I'm not sure what the Olympic sports' coaches will feel about this, but I imagine it can be worked out.

It seems like an overhyped PR move IMO. Teams will still round out their non-conference schedules with mostly crap guarantee opponents. The Big 10 and Pac 12 teams will use their inter-conference matchup as their one annual legitimate non-conference game.

PSU for example played a home and home with Bama. OSU played a home and home with Texas a few seasons ago. Those matchups will go away because PSU & OSU won't face 2 legitimate non-conference opponents in the same season.

This is either going to lead to a 13th game on the schedule for NCAA or is being done in anticipation of a 13th game. Take USC, for example- they have 9 PAC-12 games. They already play ND every year. With this game that means they'd have only one cupcake, er, OOC game left to schedule a year. That's not likely to fly, especially if it's a year where they have 5 PAC-12 road games.

Rocco wrote:This is either going to lead to a 13th game on the schedule for NCAA or is being done in anticipation of a 13th game. Take USC, for example- they have 9 PAC-12 games. They already play ND every year. With this game that means they'd have only one cupcake, er, OOC game left to schedule a year. That's not likely to fly, especially if it's a year where they have 5 PAC-12 road games.

I thought about this too. They will either do what the Big 10 is doing and look at going back to 8 conference games, or like you said, their will be a 13th game, mainly because of the reasons you state.

And if there is a 13th game approved, I'm going to be angry, as the college presidents use the excuse of there will be too many games if there is a playoff, yet they've already added a 12th, and now possibly a 13th. I just wish they'd say it's not about the student athletes and all about the money.

Draftnik wrote:It seems like an overhyped PR move IMO. Teams will still round out their non-conference schedules with mostly crap guarantee opponents. The Big 10 and Pac 12 teams will use their inter-conference matchup as their one annual legitimate non-conference game.

PSU for example played a home and home with Bama. OSU played a home and home with Texas a few seasons ago. Those matchups will go away because PSU & OSU won't face 2 legitimate non-conference opponents in the same season.

It's absolutely an overhyped PR move. And ESPN will hype it up and so will the fans, which in turns brings them more money.

Rocco wrote:This is either going to lead to a 13th game on the schedule for NCAA or is being done in anticipation of a 13th game. Take USC, for example- they have 9 PAC-12 games. They already play ND every year. With this game that means they'd have only one cupcake, er, OOC game left to schedule a year. That's not likely to fly, especially if it's a year where they have 5 PAC-12 road games.

I dont think that this means a 13th game as much as it could be in preparation for some sort of playoff system. Every year that passes the BCS falls further out of favor.

Rocco wrote:This is either going to lead to a 13th game on the schedule for NCAA or is being done in anticipation of a 13th game. Take USC, for example- they have 9 PAC-12 games. They already play ND every year. With this game that means they'd have only one cupcake, er, OOC game left to schedule a year. That's not likely to fly, especially if it's a year where they have 5 PAC-12 road games.

I dont think that this means a 13th game as much as it could be in preparation for some sort of playoff system. Every year that passes the BCS falls further out of favor.

How does it prepare for a playoff system? I dont' see that at all. In fact, while I agree the BCS is falling out of favor, if anything, I think this is the Pac and Big 10 getting a stronger relationship together and protecting the Rose Bowl as well. And if anything, I think if the BCS falls apart, we are going back to the old bowl system where the bowls can pick and choose their own tie ins with conferences, and there are no AQ slots or at large bids for the 4 major bowls.

Rocco wrote:This is either going to lead to a 13th game on the schedule for NCAA or is being done in anticipation of a 13th game. Take USC, for example- they have 9 PAC-12 games. They already play ND every year. With this game that means they'd have only one cupcake, er, OOC game left to schedule a year. That's not likely to fly, especially if it's a year where they have 5 PAC-12 road games.

I dont think that this means a 13th game as much as it could be in preparation for some sort of playoff system. Every year that passes the BCS falls further out of favor.

Maybe, though I would think expectation of a playoff would lead to schools scheduling down so they weren't chewed up for the post-season. I think it's also a sign they expect the Rose Bowl to go away and want to continue the history of the two conferences playing. They've talked about getting rid of AQs and whatnot, but the Rose is always going to do everything possible to take a B1G team and a PAC team (example- 2007, where they took a mediocre Illinois to get throttled by USC rather than Georgia which might have been a good game). If the bowls didn't exist anymore...

I think it will still be a while before bowls go away. The Pac and Big 10 will do everything they can to protect the Rose Bowl. That is their baby.

Everything I have read is pointing towards the major conferences wanting to go back to the previous way the bowl system worked, and only have the BCS run the championship game. They want to get rid of the AQs, and keep the money to themselves in the larger bowl games instead of letting smaller programs in/having a bad matchup a la Uconn last year.

Maybe you are correct though in them looking into the distant future. I think when a lot of these old school guys start to retire and a new generation of leadership comes in, maybe then conversations will start to lean towards a playoff, but I can't see that happeneing for a number of years.

newarenanow wrote:How does it prepare for a playoff system? I dont' see that at all. In fact, while I agree the BCS is falling out of favor, if anything, I think this is the Pac and Big 10 getting a stronger relationship together and protecting the Rose Bowl as well. And if anything, I think if the BCS falls apart, we are going back to the old bowl system where the bowls can pick and choose their own tie ins with conferences, and there are no AQ slots or at large bids for the 4 major bowls.

While it is unlikely, others have compared this relationship with the "challenge" games that basketball schools play between conferences. In those matchups typically the best schools from each conference play. It will be interesting to see if that format is applied to football.

These games could be played after the two conference championships occur and eventually take the place of the current bowl structure. The Rose Bowl would showcase the two conference champions with the winner going to a 4 team playoff.

IanMoran wrote:I'm not a lawyer, but does WVU actually have any chance in this?

To mean it seems pretty obvious they have to abide but the exit policy

I'm no lawyer either, but it doesn't appear so. Their strongest argument has to be that TCU didn't abide by the 27 month rule.

I'm hearing that the BE realizes it really doesn't want to have a school in the conference who's essentially being held hostage. Pending the outcome of the hearing today in court, they realize that accept a monetary settlement to waive the 27 months might be the best move.

Meanwhile, the Big 12 might be inclined to help grease the skids to speed up WVU's exit so that they can put ten teams on the field next year and keep the Lucrative TV contract.